Rendered at 17:43:58 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Cloudflare Workers.
anenefan 18 hours ago [-]
I once over a decade and a bit ago, chased a scam / con that was taking mostly the more elderly home owner victims for tens of thousands ... all the way back into Google itself within non public workspace. Yes I'd got around some security to thoroughly confirm just where, figuring Google would be happy not to be in the cross hairs with authorities, would gladly appreciate a heads up and deal with this serious scam bunkered within it ... imagine my surprise that there was no reply - well not an email, however they (whomever at google that dealt with my email) immediately opted to burn everything my thankfully halfway anonymous email was connected to. Sometimes I wonder how things might be different at Google had I just sent all the info to the relevant authorities.
orionblastar 19 hours ago [-]
This is unacceptable. I have schizoaffective disorder and am cognitively impaired, and I usually ignore ads. I don't have a lot of money, but I could lose my house if I am scammed. So I have to be careful.
18 hours ago [-]
innagadadavida 18 hours ago [-]
This recently happened to my elderly relative. He downloaded an app to take a test needed for his profession and the full screen ad selling a PDF reader convinced him that something was missing on his Android phone and he needed to spend hundreds of dollars to install the PDF reader paid edition as the subscription had expired. It fooled me for a few minutes as well. Google’s ad practices are totally disgusting. I wonder if the same app on iPhone is any better or if that suffers the same fate as android as the ad toolkits are maximally scam infused.
georgemcbay 18 hours ago [-]
Gross.
IMO Section 230 should specifically not apply to ad networks.
Ad networks should be held responsible for the content of ads they display as if they were their own.
If you can't still make boatloads of money while making sure the ads you're hoisting on to users aren't fraud and grift, you shouldn't be making boatloads of money.
IMO Section 230 should specifically not apply to ad networks.
Ad networks should be held responsible for the content of ads they display as if they were their own.
If you can't still make boatloads of money while making sure the ads you're hoisting on to users aren't fraud and grift, you shouldn't be making boatloads of money.